Yes, Bob Costas. Next question?

by

Bob Costas GunsBob Costas is one of those celebrities (in his case, a sports broadcaster) who has used his position to lecture we little people on different topics (on guns here, here, and here).  Well, he’s continuing to ride that bicycle by totally misinterpreting the Second Amendment (or, based on his previous outbursts), shows his Progressive nature and sneers at the Second Amendment while on the Bill Maher show:

Is this what the Founding Fathers had in mind? That Greg Hardy should be armed to the teeth? That private citizens should be able to purchase cop-killer, armor piercing bullets? That you should be able to have a AK-47?

The answer is yes, they DID expect citizens to be armed – to come to the defense of their new nation if needed:

 A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

“Regulated” back then meant “in good working order” – an effective fighting force made up of ordinary citizens (and not an overbearing government bureaucracy defining every jot and tittle about how something or somebody is to function).  And being a militia, citizens were, in many cases, to bring their personal arms to such an assemblage (as government supplied arms were often non-existent).  And if that militia was to fight against another army, you bet that its arms should at least be equal to the arms the opposing force would have.  Which means that the citizens, bringing their own arms to the fray, needed to own just that (if financially possible).

Remember, the purpose of the Second Amendment is NOT for hunters and not for sporting purposes – it is for the defense against a tyrannical government (foreign or domestic).  So the Founders DID want us armed.  Properly armed in the case of that eventuality.  Besides, what is the downsides of being armed?  Plenty of people have literal armories of weapons – for hunting, sporting, or self defense.  And yes, that would include armor piercing rounds or AK-47s.  Look at its plain words.

Remember, the Constitution was not written to restrict OUR rights but the Federal Government’s power to be used against us.  Yes, Bob Costas, we can own an AK-47.  Fully automatic too, according to Federal law (state laws vary).  It wasn’t until some bureaucrat decided to change a regulation that green tips were even under discussion (and under an Obama Administration) that this became an issue.  Hey, people own all kinds of military vehicles including fully functional tanks (that fire real rounds) – wicked expensive but if you have the dough you get to have the bang.

Progressives – they always think the worst of people and that we Non-Progressives cannot be trusted to make decisions correctly (which is to say, in line with their stances).  Thus, Everything must be taken away and Everyone must be punished for the actions of a few.  Safety & Security is their outlook (garnished and spiced up with lots of Control, I might add) instead of Freedom.  Freedom, which is quantified by the amount of choices one can make for themselves without the interference of Government (you know, that Federal Government’s power thing).

Costas true colors always show – a Control Freak like all other Progressives.

(H/T: Big Journalism)

Author

  • Skip

    Co-founder of GraniteGrok, my concern is around Individual Liberty and Freedom and how the Government is taking that away. As an evangelical Christian and Conservative with small "L" libertarian leanings, my fight is with Progressives forcing a collectivized, secular humanistic future upon us. As a TEA Party activist, citizen journalist, and pundit!, my goal is to use the New Media to advance the radical notions of America's Founders back into our culture.

    View all posts
Share to...